alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex_130415.htm


Exhibit 4.9


 


FORM OF COMMON SECURITIES CERTIFICATE


 


 


THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT TRANSFERABLE EXCEPT TO THE


DEPOSITOR OR AN AFFILIATE OF THE DEPOSITOR IN COMPLIANCE


WITH APPLICABLE LAW AND SECTION 510 OF THE TRUST


AGREEMENT AND ONLY IN CONNECTION WITH A


SIMULTANEOUS DELEGATION AND ASSIGNMENT OF


THE EXPENSE AGREEMENT REFERRED TO THEREIN


 


	
			Certificate Number

				
			Number of Common Securities

			
	
			C-

				
			 

			



 


 


Certificate Evidencing Common Securities


of


Air T Funding


_______ Common Securities


(liquidation amount $25 per Common Security)


 


Air T Funding, a statutory trust formed under the laws of the State of Delaware (the “Issuer Trust”), hereby certifies that [NAME OF HOLDER] (the “Holder”) is the registered owner of ____________ common securities of the Issuer Trust representing common undivided beneficial interests in the assets of the Issuer Trust and designated the Air T Funding 8.0% Common Securities (liquidation amount $25 per Common Security) (the “Common Securities”). Except in accordance with Section 510 of the Trust Agreement (as defined below) the Common Securities are not transferable and any attempted transfer hereof other than in accordance therewith shall be void. The designations, rights, privileges, restrictions, preferences and other terms and provisions of the Common Securities are set forth in, and this certificate and the Common Securities represented hereby are issued and shall in all respects be subject to the terms and provisions of, the Amended and Restated Trust Agreement of the Issuer Trust, dated as of [_________, 2018], as the same may be amended from time to time (the “Trust Agreement”), among Air T, Inc., as Depositor, Delaware Trust Company, as Property Trustee and as Delaware Trustee, and the Administrative Trustees named therein, including the designation of the terms of the Common Securities as set forth therein. The Issuer Trust will furnish a copy of the Trust Agreement to the holder without charge upon written request to the Issuer Trust at its principal place of business or registered office.


 


Upon receipt of this certificate, the Holder is bound by the Trust Agreement and is entitled to the benefits thereunder.


 


Terms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Trust Agreement.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, one of the Administrative Trustees of the Issuer Trust has executed this certificate this ___ day of _______, 2018.


 


	
			 

				
			AIR T Funding

				
			 

			
	
			 

				
			By: 

				
			 

				
			 

			
	
			 

				
			Brett Reynolds


			Administrative Trustee
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOUND ON PAGES
3-5 OF THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE YEAR TO DATE AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          14,432
<SECURITIES>                                     8,143
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,772
<ALLOWANCES>                                       925
<INVENTORY>                                     16,882
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,536
<PP&E>                                          28,165
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,619
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  76,615
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,579
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           185
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,297
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    76,615
<SALES>                                         61,825
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,825
<CGS>                                           35,257
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,257
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                42,727
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,042)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,470)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (11,572)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,708)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.70)
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gus Leventhal, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed. Ho opinion. Present— Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Scott and Hotchkiss, JJ.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 17,701

 17,313

 17,146

 16,579

 15,440

 13,401

 12,812

 13,200

 14,189

 11,507

 9,483

 7,263

 6,346

 6,870

 7,752

 7,868

 7,026

 7,826

 6,775

 5,308

 3,853

 3,696

 3,760

 5,332

 7,540

 7,482

 7,386

 7,548

 7,662

 0

 0

 6,043

 5,861

 5,904

 5,976

 6,005

 5,710

 5,084

 4,861

 6,137

 3,539

 1,886

 1,193

 850

 968

 821

 1,075

 928

 979

 1,218

 1,070

 848

 815

 643

 674

 947

 834

 711

 653

 881

 0

 0

 11,134

 10,788

 10,774

 10,845

 10,545

 9,798

 9,088

 9,175

 9,257

 6,905

 4,790

 3,487

 2,688

 2,650

 3,090

 3,262

 3,074

 3,390

 3,228

 2,570

 1,903

 1,762

 1,582

 2,245

 2,735

 2,494

 2,392

 2,465

 2,607

 0

 0

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

JANUARY 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: February 1, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PITTSBURG BOTTOM ON THE SACRAMENTO RIVER
<PAGE>   1

                   SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                        Washington, D.C.  20549


                                FORM 8-K


                             CURRENT REPORT



                   Pursuant to Section 13 or 15 (d) of
                   The Securities Exchange Act of 1934



   Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):  July 30, 1999


                      Champion Enterprises, Inc.
       (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



                              Michigan
           State or other jurisdiction of incorporation



            1-9751                            38-2743168
     Commission File Number        IRS Employer Identification No.


     2701 University Dr., Suite 300, Auburn Hills, Michigan  48326
    (Address of principal executive offices)            (Zip Code)


Registrant's telephone number, including area code:  (248) 340-9090




<PAGE>   2


Item 5.  Other Events.

     On July 30, 1999 the Registrant issued a press release, which is attached
as Exhibit 99.



Item 7.  Exhibits.

Exhibit
Number.

  99     Press release dated July 30, 1999.


<PAGE>   3


                                   SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                                   CHAMPION ENTERPRISES, INC.



                                   /S/ JOSEPH H. STEGMAYER
                                   Joseph H. Stegmayer
                                   Executive Vice President, Chief
                                   Strategic and Financial Officer




July 30, 1999


<PAGE>   4


                          INDEX TO EXHIBITS




Exhibit No.                 Description
-----------                 -----------

99                Press release dated July 30, 1999
§ 340.16 Debt collection. ( a ) The Associate Executive Director for Unemployment and Sickness Insurance shall take steps to collect all delinquent debts due the Board under the benefit provisions of the Act, except those that have been classed as uncollectible. Such steps shall commence not later than July 1, 1985 and shall include notice to each debtor of the time limit for paying the debt and the consequences of failure to pay on time.
( b ) It shall be the duty of every employer or other person paying remuneration for time lost or any sum or damages for personal injury to remit the amount of reimbursement due the Board, if any, within 30 days of the date of the payment of remuneration or damages to an employee. Failure to remit the amount due within 30 days shall subject the employer or other person to interest and penalties, in addition to the principal amount due the Board.
[50 FR 36872, Sept. 10, 1985]
#### James H. McMurtry v. Columbia National Bank of Lincoln.

Filed December 9, 1897.

No. 7664.

1. Execution: Appraisement: Review. This court will not review the appraisement made of real estate'sold on execution, for the purpose of determining whether such appraisement is too high or too low, unless objections on that ground be made and filed in the court from which the execution issued, before the sale occurred, and such objections be ruled upon by said court.

2. -: Sale: Review. Evidence examined and *held*to sustain the finding of the district court that the execution creditor had not caused the real estate in controversy to be levied upon and sold contrary to a valid agreement existing between himself and the execution defendant.

Error from the district court of Lancaster county. Tried below before Tibbets, J.

*Affirmed.*

*Field <& Brown,*for plaintiff in error.

*Brown & Leese, contra.*

*22Ragan, C.

This is a proceeding in error to review a judgment of the district court of Lancaster county confirming an execution sale of real estate.

1. The first assignment is that the value placed upon the property by the appraisers was very much less than its fair value. We cannot review this assignment for the reason that no objections to the appraisal were made and filed in the court from which the execution issued, before the sale occurred. *(Overall v.*McShane, 49 Neb., 64, and cases there cited.)

2. The plaintiff in error insisted in the court below, as a ground for setting aside the sale, that the execution creditor had caused the real estate to be seized and sold contrary to a valid agreement existing between himself and the plaintiff in error, in and by which, for a certain consideration, execution was not to issue until after a year from the date of said agreement; and that the execution on which the sale in controversy was made was issued before the expiration of the year, in violation of the terms of such agreement. The plaintiff in error now insists that the district court erred in finding and holding that no .such an agreement existed. To sustain his contention as to said agreement the plaintiff in error filed in the court below his affidavit. The execution creditor in answer to this filed his affidavit, in which he does not deny the making of the agreement claimed by the plaintiff in error, but alleges that it has no reference to the property in controversy here, and specifically points out what property was embraced within that agreement. These two affidavits constitute all the evidence on the subject. We cannot say that the district court reached the wrong conclusion from the evidence before it, and its judgment is

Affirmed,
§ 418.3420 How are funds held in financial institution accounts counted? ( a ) *Owner of the account.* Funds held in a financial institution account (including savings, checking, and time deposits also known as certificates of deposit) are considered your resources if you own the account and can use the funds for your support and maintenance. We determine whether you own the account and can use the funds by looking at how the account is held.
( b ) *Individually-held account.* If you are designated as the sole owner by the account title and you can withdraw and use funds from that account for your support and maintenance, all of that account's funds are your resource regardless of the source. For as long as these conditions are met, we presume that you own 100 percent of the funds in the account. This presumption is not rebuttable.
( c ) *Jointly-held account.* ( 1 ) If you are the only subsidy claimant or subsidy recipient who is an account holder on a jointly held account, we presume that all of the funds in the account belong to you. If more than one subsidy claimant or subsidy recipient are account holders, we presume that the funds in the account belong to those individuals in equal shares.
( 2 ) If you disagree with the ownership presumption as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, you may rebut the presumption. Rebuttal is a procedure which permits you to furnish evidence and establish that some or all of the funds in a jointly-held account do not belong to you.
Editorial Note on Part 416
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 416 appear at 68 FR 53509, Sept. 11, 2003.

§ 416.1457 Dismissal of a request for a hearing before an administrative law judge. An administrative law judge may dismiss a request for a hearing under any of the following conditions: ( a ) At any time before notice of the hearing decision is mailed, you or the party or parties that requested the hearing ask to withdraw the request. This request may be submitted in writing to the administrative law judge or made orally at the hearing.
( b ) ( 1 ) ( i ) Neither you nor the person you designate to act as your representative appears at the time and place set for the hearing and you have been notified before the time set for the hearing that your request for a hearing may be dismissed without further notice if you did not appear at the time and place of hearing, and good cause has not been found by the administrative law judge for your failure to appear; or
( ii ) Neither you nor the person you designate to act as your representative appears at the time and place set for the hearing and within 10 days after the administrative law judge mails you a notice asking why you did not appear, you do not give a good reason for the failure to appear.
( 2 ) In determining good cause or good reason under this paragraph, we will consider any physical, mental, educational, or linguistic limitations (including any lack of facility with the English language) which you may have.
( c ) The administrative law judge decides that there is cause to dismiss a hearing request entirely or to refuse to consider any one or more of the issues because— ( 1 ) The doctrine of *res judicata* applies in that we have made a previous determination or decision under this subpart about your rights on the same facts and on the same issue or issues, and this previous determination or decision has become final by either administrative or judicial action;
( 2 ) The person requesting a hearing has no right to it under § 416.1430;
( 3 ) You did not request a hearing within the stated time period and we have not extended the time for requesting a hearing under § 416.1433(c); or
( 4 ) You die, there are no other parties, and we have no information to show that you may have a survivor who may be paid benefits due to you under § 416.542(b) and who wishes to pursue the request for hearing, or that you authorized interim assistance reimbursement to a State pursuant to section 1631(g) of the Act. The administrative law judge, however, will vacate a dismissal of the hearing request if, within 60 days after the date of the dismissal: ( i ) A person claiming to be your survivor, who may be paid benefits due to you under § 416.542(b), submits a written request for a hearing, and shows that a decision on the issues that were to be considered at the hearing may adversely affect him or her; or
( ii ) We receive information showing that you authorized interim assistance reimbursement to a State pursuant to section 1631(g) of the Act.
[45 FR 52096, Aug. 5, 1980, as amended at 50 FR 21439, May 24, 1985; 51 FR 308, Jan. 3, 1986; 58 FR 52913, Oct. 13, 1993; 59 FR 1637, Jan. 12, 1994]
§ 641.841 What policies govern nepotism? ( a ) SCSEP recipients must ensure that no recipient or sub-recipient hires, and no host agency serves as a worksite for, a person who works in a SCSEP community service assignment if a member of that person's immediate family is engaged in a decision-making capacity (whether compensated or not) for that project, subproject, recipient, sub-recipient, or host agency. The Department may exempt worksites on Native American reservations and in rural areas from this requirement provided that adequate justification can be documented, such as that no other persons are eligible and available for participation in the program.
( b ) To the extent that an applicable State or local legal nepotism requirement is more restrictive than this provision, SCSEP recipients must ensure that the more restrictive requirement is followed.
( c ) For purposes of this section, “immediate family” means wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother- in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, stepparent, stepchild, grandparent, or grandchild.
#### § 220.63 Conflict of interest.

All implications of possible conflict of interest between Board medical consultants and their medical practices will be avoided. Board review physicians or psychologists will not perform consultative examinations for the Board's disability programs without prior approval. In addition, they will not acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, including any member of their families, any financial interest in a medical partnership or similar relationship in which consultative examinations are provided. Sometimes one of the Board's review physicians or psychologists will have prior knowledge of a case (e.g., the claimant was a patient). Where this is so, the physician or psychologist will not participate in the review or determination of the case. This does not preclude the physician or psychologist from submitting medical evidence based on prior treatment or examination of the claimant.
#### § 418.3620 What is the effect of an initial determination?

An initial determination is binding unless you request an appeal within the time period stated in § 418.3630(a) or we revise it as provided in § 418.3678.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    the Quarterly Report and Form 10-Q for the period ended December 9, 2006 filed on the
date hereof by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended; and(b)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Stanislas Vilgrain
    
    Chief Executive Officer
    
    January 23, 2007Stanislas Vilgrain/s/ Yuyun Tristan Kuo

Yuyun Tristan Kuo
    
    Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer
and Corporate Secretary
    
    January 23, 2007
 32
(No. 4285

#### Phillips Petroleum Co., a Corp., Claimant, vs. State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed September 19, 1950.*

Blum and Jacobson, Attorneys for Claimant.

Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General; C. Arthur Nbbel, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

SCHUMAN, C. J.

The claimant, Phillips Petroleum Company, a corporation, furnished the Division of Highways, Bureau of Construction of the State of Illinois, certain products on June 22, 1949, amounting to the sum of $27.63; and the Department of Maintenance of the State of Illinois certain products from March 21 through August 31,1949, all as listed per exhibits attached to their claim, totalling $75.50.

The Departmental Report indicates that of this total $3.50 was paid direct to the individual service station, leaving the amount of $72.00, which is due.

It was stipulated between the parties that the materials in the amount of $72.00 were furnished to the State, but were not paid because of the automatic date of lapse of appropriation.

For the reasons stated in Case No. 4299, The Haloid Co., a Corp., an award is entered in favor of the claimant in the sum of $72.00.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-60322

Conference Calendar

 

TEODORO BARRERA-GARCIA,

Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

- - - - - - - - - -

Petition for Review of an Order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A39 295 979

- - - - - - - - - -

April 10, 1998

Before JOLLY, JONES, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Teodoro Barrera-Garcia petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ decision denying his motion to reopen and

reconsider his appeal. This court lacks jurisdiction to review

his petition. See Nguyen v. INS, 117 F.3d 206, 207 (5th Cir.

1997). IT IS ORDERED that the Respondent’s motion to dismiss is

GRANTED. IT IS ALSO ORDERED that the Respondent’s motion to

supplement the record is DENIED as moot.

PETITION DISMISSED.
§ 429.210 Do I have any appeal rights under this subpart? ( a ) *Deciding Official.* While you may not appeal the decision of the SSA Claims Officer in regard to claims under the MPCECA, the SSA Claims Officer may, at his or her discretion, reconsider his or her determination of a claim.
( b ) *Claimant.* You may request reconsideration from the SSA Claims Officer by sending a written request for reconsideration to the SSA Claims Officer within 30 days of the date of the original determination. You must clearly state the factual or legal basis upon which you base your request for a more favorable determination. Reconsideration will be granted only for reasons not available or not considered during the original decision.
( c ) *Notification.* The SSA Claims Officer will send you a written determination on your request for reconsideration. If the SSA Claims Officer elects to reconsider your claim, the final determination on reconsideration is final and conclusive.